Skip to main content

Full text of "North Carolina tobacco report [serial]"

See other formats


-^.T- TOBACCO REPORT 




THE BULLETIN 

of the 
North Caroh'na Department of Agriculture 

L. Y. Ballentine, Commissioner 
Number 175 April, 1964 



FOREWORD 

This fifteenth annual issue of the Tobacco Report 
has been compiled and prepared by W. P. Hedrick and 
J. H. Cyrus, tobacco specialists with the Division of 
Markets of the North Carolina Department of Agri- 
culture, in cooperation with the U. S. Department of 
Agriculture under the Research and Marketing Act. 

Credit is due the Cooperative Crop Reporting Serv- 
ice of the North Carolina and United States Depart- 
ments of Agriculture, and the Tobacco Division of 
the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service for much 
of the statistical data contained herein. 

This issue of the Tobacco Report is dedicated to the 
domestic cigarette manufacturers who through their 
skillful blending of flue-cured and hurley tobaccos have 
produced a superior product that consumers prefer 
around the world. 




Commissioner of Agriculture 



For free distribution by the Tobacco Section, 
Markets Division, North Carolina Depart- 
ment of Agriculture, Raleigh, N. C. 



4/(34— 6M 

2 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

The Outlook, 1964 4 

The Economic Significance of The American Tobacco Industry 10 

State Summary, 1963-64 14 

North Carolina Tobacco Warehouse Sales Report, 1963-64 16 

Summary of Dealer and Warehouse Resales, 1963-64 18 

Producer and Gross Sales of Flue-Cured Tobacco By States, 1963 18 

Stabilization Receipts by Belt — 1963 19 

Flue-Cured Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19 

Burley Movement In and Out of North Carolina 19 

North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops, 1919-1963 20 

North Carolina Burley Crops, 1928-1963 21 

North Carolina Flue-Cured Tobacco Allotments, 1964 22 

North Carolina Burley Tobacco Allotments, 1964 24 

North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses and Operators 
By Belts and Markets 26 

Domestic Cigarette Consumption By Kinds, 1963 Back Cover 



Tobacco Outlook 1964 

Marketing of the 1963 flue-cured crop was completed on 
December 17th. The season was somewhat unusual from a 
weather standpoint. Early in the spring- cold weather delayed 
transplanting in most areas. Late in the season growers were 
hampered by drought and cold weather, resulting in the pro- 
duction of a crop that was considered by the U. S. Department 
of Agriculture Tobacco Inspection Service as being below a 
normal crop in quality. However, the buying companies con- 
sidered the crop an improvement over the quality produced in 
recent years by growers due to the fact that most producers 
made an all out effort to follow recommended cultural practices 
and allowed the crop to remain in the field until thoroughly ripe. 

A combination of events contributed to a lower average price 
being received by growers. Changes, revisions and modifications 
in the structure of U. S. standard grades for tobacco, combined 
with adverse weather conditions probably were the greatest 
factors. North Carolina growers produced 901 million pounds 
of flue-cured tobacco which sold for an average price of $58.30 
per hundred pounds during 1963 ; this can be compared with the 
production of 912 million pounds which sold for an average of 
$60.20 per hundred in 1962. 

Other factors which affected the price received by growers 
was the fact that on July 1, 1963, the total supply situation had 
reached 2.9 years, or a total of 3,489 million pounds available. 
Buying companies bought only 1,082 million pounds on the wai-e- 
house floors which was 89 million pounds less than was bought 
in 1962. The probable reason for this was anticipation by the 
domestic companies of the possible effects from a report on 
smoking and health in preparation. This report was released 
by the U. S. Surgeon General's Office on January 11, 1964. 

Since less tobacco was bought by buying companies, the nat- 
ural result was that a large amount of the crop was taken by 
tne Flue-Cured Tobacco Cooperative Stabilization Corporation 
under the price support program. During the season 280 million 
pounds was received by the Stabilization Corporation bringing 

4 



the stocks held in storage to 709 million pounds, the largest 
amount ever held under loan since the Stabilization Corporation 
was established in 1946. 

On November 26 the U. S. Department of Agriculture an- 
nounced that flue-cured tobacco acreage allotments for most 
farms will be 10 per cent smaller than for 1963. The announce- 
ment pointed out that reduced allotments were necessary to 
bring supplies in better balance with demand. It recognized as 
noteworthy the eflforts of tobacco farmers to improve the quality 
of the crop. It further urged all growers in 1964 to select varieties 
and continue to follow lecommended cultural practices that 
would produce full-boc'i-d graij y tobacco. Tobaccos with these 
characteristics are' most ocsired by domestic and foreign buyers 
and are essential if U. S. growers are to share in the increasing 
world trade in tobacco. 

The 10 per cent reduction in allotments will make 421,093 
acres available in N. C. for tobacco in 1964, compared with 
467,461 acres in 1963. The action taken by the U. S. Department 
of Agricultui-e in reducing the 1964 alloted acreage will serve 
to reduce production, but probably will not bring supply in line 
with demand. The size of the entire flue-cured 1963 crop, 1,360 
million pounds, though down some from 1962, was still about 
100 million pounds more than that produced on approximately 
the same number of acres in 1961 and 1960. Yields per acre 
in 1963 for the entire flue-cured growing area averaged a new 
high of 1,957 pounds per acre. 

The supply of flue-cured tobacco by July 1, 1964, is likely to be 
about 2,400 million pounds or the second highest on record. 

Cigarette output and consumption increased for the ninth con- 
secutive year during 1963. U. S. Smokers consumed an estimated 
523 billion cigarettes. The number of people of smoking age will 
continue to increase. This, combined with probable further 
advances in consumer incomes, favors continuing high use of 
cigarettes. 

It is not yet possible to judge how the report on smoking and 
health of the Advisory Committee of the Surgeon General may 
affect cigarette consumption. Reports received from wholesale 
and retail outlets estimate that a drop of 10 to 15 per cent in 
sales was felt for the first few weeks following the publishing 
of the report. 

The export of flue-cured tobacco during 1963 showed a modest 
increase over 1962 and should reach 460 million pounds. Im- 



proved quality of the 1963 flue-cured crop is the important 
factor in the gain in exports. Shipments to the United Kingdom 
increased 31 per cent over 1962. North Carolina tobacco growers 
are continuing to feel competition from flue-cured producers in 
foreign countries, principally Rhodesia, Canada, and India. 

The 1963 crop in Rhodesia totaled 199 million pounds, averag- 
ing 48.6 U. S. cents per pound. United Kingdom buyers pur- 
chased about 108 million pounds and Australia appi'oximately 
3.5 million pounds from the 1963 auctions. A total of about 39.5 
million pounds went to western Europe. 

Canada's 1963 crop is estimated at 188 million pounds and, 
through January 14th, the crop had averaged 52.24 cents per 
pound. In contrast to previous years, no minimum grade prices 
are in force in Canada this season. Instead the grower price for 
the 1963 flue-cured tobacco is supported under a deficiency pay- 
ment program. If, at the end of the season, the average price 
received by all growers for all eligible grades is below 47 
Canadian cents (U. S. 43.6 cents) per pound, the Federal govern- 
ment will make a deficiency payment equal to the difference. 

Canadian exports of flue-cured tobacco for the first 10 months 
of 1963 were 33 million pounds with 85 per cent going to the 
United Kingdom. 

India's 1963 flue-cured crop is estimated at 148 million pounds 
and its exports at 88 million pounds. The county receiving the 
largest amount of India's tobacco was the United Kingdom with 
the second largest amount going to the Soviet Union. 

Since the United Kingdom is the largest foreign buyer of 
U. S. flue-cured tobacco, the following figures are of interest to 
North Carolina tobacco growers. Usings of American flue-cured 
tobacco during the first nine months of 1963 were 108 million 
pounds. This is an increase of 1 per cent over a similar period 
one year earlier. However, usings from Rhodesia, Canada, and 
India were 110 million pounds, up three per cent from a year 
earlier. 

Stocks of U. S. flue-cured tobacco in the United Kingdom on 
September 30, 1963, were 220 million pounds, or seven per cent 
below a year earlier. This was before purchases from the U. S. 
1963 crop by British buyers arrived in England. 

Stocks of Rhodesia and Canadian flue-cured tobacco were 
179 million pounds at the end of September 1963. 

At a meeting of the National Tobacco Industry Advisory Com- 
mittee, a committee appointed to advise the Secretary of Agri- 



culture on tobacco problems, the following comments for 1964 
were made: 

"The committee reviewed 1963 experiences on flue-cured 
tobacco markets, particularly in the light of changes made in 
tobacco grade standards and loan rates. The progress of growers 
in selecting suitable varieties and in adopting recommended cul- 
tural practices, and in allowing their tobacco to reach maturity 
before harvesting, was recognized. 

The committee favors the supply control principles. It did not 
make a specific recommendation to the Secretary of Agriculture 
on the amount of acreage reduction necessary, but did emphasize 
that the supply should be brought in line with demand without 
impairing the economic stability of the tobacco industry. 

The committee favored maximum use of available Government 
programs to expand the export market for U. S. tobacco." 

The overall price support level for the 1964 crop has been 
raised to 57.2 cents per pound which is one per cent higher than 
56.6 cents per pound level in effect in 1963. The variety discount 
program will continue in effect during 1964. 

During the 1964 season the major problem will continue to be 
"too much tobacco". The carry over on July 1, 1964 will show 
another increase up to the second highest on record. 

The 10 per cent reduction in acreage announced for 1964 will 
probably not reduce production more than 100 million pounds, 
based on current trend in yields per acre. This means that the 
total supply of flue-cured tobacco for 1964 will probably be as 
large or slightly larger than the 3,461 million pounds for 1963. 
Domestic use of flue-cured tobacco during 1964 will be affected 
directly by the impact of the report issued by the Surgeon 
General on the effects of smoking on health. 

Export outlook for the coming year is promising. Early ship- 
ments to Britain were up, as well as to West Germany, the 
second ranking outlet. Exports to both these countries were 
showing substantial gains. In spite of the bright outlook for 
exports, the total picture for the 1964 marketing season is not 
too good. 

Even with the increase to 57.2 cent per pound support price, 
growers are going to have an up-hill fight ahead. Growers will 
have to put forth an extra effort to improve the smoking quality 
of their crop. The best opportunity the grower has is to produce 
quality; this means thin-bodied, thoroughly ripe, grainy tobacco, 
with rich flavor and aroma. Also, more emphasis should be 



placed on preparation for market, so as to get it into more uni- 
form grades that will meet current market demands. So long 
as an over supply of tobacco is available, both domestic and 
foreign companies will be doing selective buying. 

Therefore, the growers who do the best job in producing 
quality tobacco, sorting and tieing it into neat bundles will be 
best equipped to meet the competition on the auction warehouse 
floors during the 1964 season. 

Burley Outlook 

North Carolina burley growers experienced a very unusual 
season during 1963-64. In early spring, cool dry weather delayed 
transplanting and the crop was olf to a slow start. During the 
growing season, intermittent rains produced a fairly good crop. 
However, during the curing season, unusually low humidity 
caused a considerable part of the crop to cure with a green cast 
or off -color which resulted in a large percentage of the crop re- 
ceiving a lower government grade than normal. Western North 
Carolina burley growers harvested 11,000 acres and had a yield 
of 2,100 pounds per acre which sold for an average of $55.50 per 
hundred pounds. This average was $4.50 per hundred pounds 
lower than 1962. 

The markets of Asheville, Boone and West Jefferson opened 
November 26 and closed for the Christmas holidays on December 
13th to alleviate crowded conditions in plants redrying tobacco 
going under government loan. Over 15 million pounds or 60 per 
cent of the crop had been sold before Christmas. 

A larger percentage of the crop went to the government under 
the price program than had gone in six previous seasons. Dur- 
ing the season, about 15 per cent was delivered to Stabilization 
from the east Tennessee, Virginia and North Carolina markets. 
Over 25 per cent was delivered from the entire burley area. 

The support level for 1964 will be 58.9 cents per pound or 
up one per cent above 1963. 

The supply level of burley on January 1 was about 1,940 mil- 
lion pounds or about 3.3 times yearly disappearance. These 
figures include 94 million pounds held under government price 
support pools. The stabilization pools received about 25 per cent 
from the 1963 crop and on March 1 held about 271 million 
pounds. 



8 




Staking burley tobacco in the field reduces its quality and the 



grower s income. 



The Secretary of Agriculture announced that the 1964 burley 
acreage will be reduced by 10 per cent, in order to bring supply 
more in line with demand. The domestic use of burley tobacco 
has been on the increase for the past five years, and was 540 
million pounds in 1963. The manufacture of cigarettes, the main 
use of burley, increased two per cent over the previous period. 
A considerable volume of burley is used in smoking tobacco. 

Should the report on smoking and health affect the use of 
burley in cigarettes, there is a possibility that some of the loss 
would be regained by the possible increase in the use of smoking 
tobacco. Early reports indicate that pipe smoking is on the in- 
crease. Exports of burley, though not significant until recently, 
continue to show increases. In the first 10 months of 1963, ex- 
ports of burley were 14 per cent larger than the previous year, 
when 53 million pounds were exported. 

Burley tobacco does not have the strong competition from 
foreign production that flue-cured tobacco has. Therefore, burley 
exports should continue to increase over the years. 

North Carolina growers continue to use practices that reduce 
quality and directly affect income. Probably the most wasteful is 
staking in the field. This practice in most cases causes tobacco 
to get sun-burned or, if rains come during the time tobacco is 
out, dirt gets on the leaf. In many cases, tobacco is handled in 
this manner and gets a No Grade from the inspector on the 
auction floor. If tobacco is sorted carefully, it will command 
higher support prices and higher auction prices when sold. 



The Economic Significance 
Of The American Tobacco Industry 

Condensed from an address by L. Y. Ballentine, Commissioner of 
Agriculture for North Carolina, at the annual meeting of the 
American Public Health Association, Kansas City, Missouri, 
Nocember 11, 1963. 
Although not an economist by profession, my interest in the tobacco 
economy lured me to accept the invitation to take part in this program, 
believing also that after a lifetime spent in the No. 1 tobacco state of the 
nation, I had a fairly good layman's working knowledge of the economic 
significance of the American tobacco industry. 

But as I delved into the subject I came to realize two things; first, that 
available information reveals tobacco as having more impact and on more 
industries than I had realized, and, second, that its significance to still 
other segments of the economy, for which the statistics are lacking, must 
be equally as great, if not greater. 

Indeed, the significance of tobacco in our economy could be compared 
to the effect of a stone dropped into a large body of water, producing 
ripples that go on and on until they reach the fartherest shore. 

Recently I saw a newspaper reference to American tobacco as an eight 
billion dollar industry. This figure represents approximately the amount 
consumers spent for tobacco products last year in this country plus 
American exports of unmanufactured tobacco. It would appear, then, that 
all there is left for me to do is to slice up this eight billion dollar pie between 
growers, manufacturers and manufacturing employees, exporters and re- 
tailers of tobacco. But it is not that simple. Aside from the fact that 
the pie is actually bigger than this, such an analysis would give only a 
limited indication of even this eight billion dollar significance in our 
economy. 

Beginning, however, with this eight billion dollar figure, let's take a 
look at the income it generates and who shares in it. 

First, however, a word is in order about the figures I will cite in this 
paper. Some are official published statistics. Some, however, necessarily 
had to be my own estimates based on known statistical factors; but all 
such estimates have been carefully scaled down on the conservative side. 
It is certainly not my desire to present you with any exaggerated or blown 
up picture of the economic importance of tobacco. 

10 




"The butcher, the baker, the tobacco stick maker" a'.\ hz/s 
an economic stake in tobacco. 

Tobacco begins, of course, with the farm. Last year some 750,000 Amer- 
ican farm families in 21 states received a little over 1.3 billion dollars 
for the sale of their tobacco crops. Tobacco is the fifth largest cash crop in 
the nation, and last year ranked third in value of all agricultural exports. 
The cash farm income from tobacco exceeded the total for all truck crops 
grown in the entire nation. It is also interesting to note that last year's 
cash farm receipts from tobacco represented eight percent of the total for 
all crops in the United States, yet tobacco was grown on only about 
four-tenths of one percent of the nation's cropland. 

Tobacco is a relatively high-cost, high-labor crop to produce. Estimates 
indicate that farmers paid at least 155 million dollars for hired labor in 
the production and curing of tobacco last year, while for other expenses 
in tobacco production and marketing farmers paid more than half a billion 
dollars. 

Here is what their share of this half billion dollars tobacco production 
expenditures means to some industries. To the fertilizer and lime industry 
it means about forty-five million dollars a year and to the pesticide industry 
about twenty million dollars. The fuel oil used in curing tobacco brings 
the petroleum industry some seventy million dollars a year. Cotton farmers 
and the textile industry share in this expenditure, as farmers spend about 
eight million dollars a year for tobacco plant bed cloth. Tobacco curer 
replacements bring the manufacturers of this equipment about eleven 
million dollars annually. Twine used for tying tobacco runs about two and 
a half million dollars a year, and a like amount is spent for plastic covers 
used in plant bed fumigation. About one and a half million dollars are spent 
each year for tobacco seed. Tobacco warehouse commissions run at least 
forty million dollars a year. 



11 



These are by no means all of the businesses and industries that have a 
big economic stake in the production and marketing of tobacco. I had no 
means of obtaining a dollar figure on what this crop means to banks and 
other financial institutions. I only know it must be a sizable one, because 
most tobacco farmers require production financing from planting to harvest. 
Similarly, I was unable to obtain the basis for a sound estimate of what 
this crop means to the forest industries that produce tobacco sticks and 
baskets. And no figure is available for the depreciation or replacement of 
farm trucks and farm machinery that can be charged solely to the pro- 
duction of tobacco. While tobacco has not been a highly mechanized crop 
it is now moving more in that direction and investment in tobacco planters, 
harvesters, and bulk curing barns are going to figure much larger in the 
future. 

Still a greater unknown quantity is the economic impact of tobacco on 
retail establishments throughout the entire tobacco belt. Every kind of 
retailer of goods and services, from the owner of the tiniest lunch counter 
to dealers in automobiles, household appliances and other durable goods 
depend heavily on the sale of the tobacco crop in their communities; and 
their sales in turn have an economic impact on manufacturers of these 
consumer goods in all parts of the nation. 

Now, so far, this analysis has been concerned with the tobacco economy 
only from the farm to the sales warehouse and into the custody of the 
manufacturers or exporters who buy the leaf. And, in the parlance of the 
street, "you ain't heard nothin' yet." Next we take up the processing and 
selling of tobacco products. 

American tobacco manufacturers in 1961 gave employment to nearly 
96,000 people whose wages totaled more than 379 million dollars. Cigarettes 
constitute the bulk of tobacco manufacturing. While theirs is a highly 
automated operation and cigarette manufacturers employed only about 44 
percent of the total engaged in tobacco manufacturing, they accounted for 
more than 5.5 percent of this industry's payroll. 

Tobacco processing, like tobacco production, generates sizable employ- 
ment and income for other industries. Tobacco manufacturing plants, the 
wholesalers and retailers who sell tobacco products, and the companies 
which supply goods and services to the industry, employ millions. It is 
estimated that, overall, some 17 million people depend on tobacco for all 
or part of their livelihood. 

For instance, the transportation of tobacco within the borders of con- 
tinental United States is, at a very conservative estimate, a 79 million 
dollar a year business. Cigarette paper is approximately a 25 million dollar 
a year industry; and in this connection it is interesting to note that farmers 
in four states where no tobacco is grown derive an annual income of about 
3 million dollars for the production of flax seed fiber used in the manu- 
facture of cigarette paper. 

Tobacco advertising, as you know, constitutes a tremendous industry. 
An indication of its size is given in an article recently published in the 
weekly magazine TOBACCO, which surveys the 1962 expenditure of the 
six big United States tobacco manufacturers in advertising 21 leading 
brands of cigarettes. This amounted to $146,592,464 in direct payments 
to advertising media. Of this total, network television received nearly 78 
million dollars and spot television more than 24 million dollars. Magazines 

12 



received more than 26 million dollars, newspapers more than 16 million 
dollars, and outdoor advertisers more than 11/2 million dollars. 

The economic share of some other industries in tobacco manufacturing 
could be obtained only in terms of quantity, not dollars and cents. For 
mstance, tobacco manufacturers used about 40 million pounds of cello- 
phane in 1961. Tobacco is the third largest user of cellophane, following 
only the bakery and meat industries. Approximately 71 million pounds of 
alummum foil are used annually for wrapping cigarettes and other tobacco 
products. I was unable to obtain even a quantitative figure for other 
paper used in packaging cigarettes and for cigarette cartons. But we do 
know that American manufacturers produced over 22 percent of the world's 
output of cigarettes last year, an output equivalent to nearly 27 billion 
packs or 2.7 billion cartons. Thus it is evident that the paper industry 
has no small stake in tobacco manufacturing. 

There is absolutely no yardstick for measuring the stake of some other 
mdustries m tobacco processing, though it is well known to be sizable. 
These mclude manufacturers of the various chemicals and flavorings used in 
cigarettes, the plants supplying wooden hogsheads and cases for shipping 
tobacco, and the suppliers of machinery, precision instruments, electronic 
equipment and all the other gadgets that go to make up the whole big 
complex of a modern cigarette factory. 

I should mention also that about 28 percent of the tobacco leaf (in 
pounds) sold last year in free world markets came from the United States 
About 391 million dollars worth of unmanufactured tobacco was exported 
from America, and over 200 million dollars worth of manufactured tobacco 
products. 

In addition to the means of livelihood tobacco affords to so many millions 
this product pays for many services at all levels of government. Excise 
taxes collected from tobacco products by state, federal and local govern- 
ments amounted to some 3.2 billion dollars for the fiscal year 1961-62 
Cigarette taxes, incidentally, amounted to more than four times the amoun' 
received by tobacco growers for the tobacco used in domestically consumed 
cigarettes. 

Federal excise taxes on cigarettes alone, at nearly two billion dollars 
were more than 15 percent of the total federal excise taxes collected that 
year This is a rather startling proportion when you consider the host of 
widely used products on which excise taxes are collected, including public 
entertainment, gasoline, alcoholic beverages, cosmetics, cameras and films 
turs and jewelry, to name only a very few. ' 

In addition, tobacco manufacturers paid federal income taxes totaling 
nearly 330 million dollars. And ad valorem taxes paid by tobacco manu- 
facturers run into millions annually. In North Carolina alone, tobacco 
manufacturers paid about 7% million dollars in ad valorem taxes last year 

Fossibly many more ramifications of the American tobacco economy could 
be cited. But I believe we have already considered enough to give you 
some Idea of the magnitude of tobacco in our economy and the way it 
reaches into nearly every American industry and household. To paraphrase 
the old nursery rhyme, - the butcher, the baker, the tobacco stick maker 
au have an economic stake in tobacco. 

The tobacco economy had a profound efl'ect on the early settlement of 
this country and the opening up of new lands. For the first permanent 
(Continued on Page 25) 

13 



State Summary 1963-64 

The 1963-64 flue-cured marketing season in North Carolina came to a 
dragging end on December 17, with the completion of sales in the Old Belt. 
There was much congestion in some redrying and processing facilities 
during September, making it necessary to reduce selling time. During the 
period from September 11-20, which covered eight sale days, the selling 
time was reduced from 5% hours to four hours per day. The sales returned 
to a 5% hour schedule on September 23, but it was necessary to call a 
sales holiday on September 25 and another on October 4 to help relieve 
congestion. 

Based on U. S. standard grades, the quality of the 1963 crop was inferior 
to the 1962 crop. Nevertheless, buying companies generally agreed that 
the cigarette qualities, which may be different from the quality factors in 
standard grades, did show some improvement in the 1963 crop. 

The actual support price ^h;,: growers received on their 1963 crop was 
considerably less than the esti.i.lished level. The average support price in 
1963 for both tied and untied tobacco was 56.6 cents per pound. When 
this average support is broken down and applied separately to tied and 
untied tobacco, it shows that the established level of support for tied 
tobacco in 1963 was 57.3 cents. However, actual support received 

for all tied tobacco graded at the warehou^ during the 1963 season, 
whether it went under loan or not, was only 53.9 cents per pound. This 
was 4.4 cents below the established support for tied tobacco in 1963, and 
it amounted to about 74% parity. The reason why the 1963 support dropped 
below the established level was because a larger percentage of the crop 
graded into (KL), (KF), (KV), and (KM) variegated grades than the 
normal percentage expected for an average crop. 

The 44 flue-cured markets in North Carolina sold 872,579,600 pounds of 
farmer tobacco during the 1963 season, for a return of $509,905,929. The 
average price dropped to $58.40 which was the lowest level since 1959. 
In 1962 growers received $530,713,387 for their offerings of 881,367,562 
pounds, giving them a season average in 1962 of $60.53. A comparison of 
1963 with the previous year shows a decline in average price of $2.13, a 
decline in dollar value of $20,807,458, and a decline in volume of 8,787,962 
pounds. 

During the first seven days in all belts, price supports were available 
on untied grades of primings and lugs and best nondescript from those 
grades. At the same time price supports were available on all grades of tied 
tobacco that are normally supported. 

Type 13 — The Border Belt started the 1963 marketing season in North 
Carolina on August 1. Many grades sold for a higher average price during 
the 1963 season when compared to the previous year. Most increases were 
from $1 to $3 per hundred. However, the general market average showed 
a decline due to an increase in the percentage of the crop grading into 
lower quality grades, especially nondescript. Most losses occurred in 
green, immature, and nondescript grades, which ranged from $1 to $5. 

Farmers sold 166,160,612 pounds on the eight North Carolina markets in 
this belt, and received $99,768,328 for their offerings. This gave them 
a season average of $60.04 per hundred. In 1962 growers received $110,- 

14 



253,987 from the sale of 179,996,824 pounds which averaged $61.25. 

Auction sales ended in this belt on October 17, covering a period of 53 
sale days compared with 48 days in 1962. 

Type 12— The 17 Eastern Belt markets opened for the 1963 season on 
August 22. Many of the grades offered showed a higher market average 
when compared with the 1962 levels. The cigarette qualities and the market 
demand showed an improvement in this belt over the previous year. How- 
ever, there was a decline in the general market average because of an 
unusually large increase in the percentage of lower quality tobacco grad- 
ing into variegated (K) grades, which carried support prices that ranged 
from $10 to $13 below straight grades. 

The volume of producer sales in this belt moved up to 421,882,034 pounds, 
which was the largest volume recorded since 1956. The value of the offerings 
rose to $247,680,810, which gave them a season average of $58.71. In 
1962 growers selling in this belt received $239,716,393 for 400,129,062 
pounds of tobacco, which averaged $59.91 per hundred. 

The Eastern Belt completed its 1963 season on November 14, covering a 
period of 57 sale days, compared with 50 days in 1962. 

Type IIB— The Middle Belt market opened for the 1963 season on Sep- 
tember 9. This was seven sale days later than the 1962 opening, and the 
latest opening for the Middle Belt since 1956. The quality of the crop was 
adversely affected by an extended drought during the growing season, which 
increased the volume of variegated (K) grades. An unusually large volume 
of these lower quality, lower support price grades caused a decline in the 
over-all market average in 1963, even though many grades sold at prices 
$1 to $3 higher than the previous year. 

Middle Belt farmers received $95,051,596 from the sale of 165,337,354 
pounds of tobacco, which averaged $57.49 per hundred. In 1962 growers 
received $104,581,804 for their offering of 171,898,450 pounds which average 
$60.84. ^ 

Final sales were held in this belt on December 6 after selling a total 
of 59 days. In 1962 the season covered a period of 50 sale days. 

Type 11 A— The North Carolina Old Belt markets opened on September 
23, 1963. The quality of offerings in the Old Belt was affected by one of the 
worst draughts since 1953. There was a strong demand for primings, lugs 
and cutters in this belt. But after the fifth week, with the volume of leaf 
mcreasmg, the demand became so weak that more than half of the remain- 
mg tobacco offered was delivered to stabilization. About 45% of the pro- 
ducer sales were placed under loan during the season. Many of the grades 
bought by the companies averaged $1 to $3 higher than the previous year, 
but, mamly because the support price was higher. 

Farmers selling on Old Belt markets during the 1963 season received 
$67,405,195 for 119,199,600 pounds offered for sale. Their season average 
was only $56.55 per hundred. A comparison with 1962 shows that growers 
fared better that year when they received $76,161,203 for 129,343 226 
pounds which averaged $58.83. ' ' ' 

Final sales were held on North Carolina Old Belt markets on December 
17. This gave these markets a total of 56 sale days which was the same 
number as they had in 1962. 

Type 31— North Carolina Burley markets at Asheville, Boone and West 
Jefferson started their 1963-64 sales on November 26. The opening was 
(Continued on Page 25) 



00 t^ c<i ca (NJ 1-H o -rj* 



cCi-tC-oOCT'^tr-I 



t-WG0'^l0THOO'^OC5CCC0t^05C00q 

o6oooio^odododcioo6odcO'-HL--i-HCr^ 



G0_ W »-H_ CD ^^ O^ I> i~l 

of CO CO i-T CD rf Co" of 
OJ-^COCTJiniHfNCO 



OOOfMOO-^t-OOOO'^OOt-COWlM'^ 
(MCDOOCOCD-^iMCDi^C^tr-u^OONOiOOOO 
00 00 '^_t-;_ai^'^^CK ^^0_N ■^__CD ^^lO o\-^^oo^ 
CD t- ■^CD C: COod C^TcO CM CO U^ Ci CM CO 00 lO 
LCi-fCOi-iiMCOOO'^CDCMOr-l(MiMaiC:<M 



r-i 1-Hr-l CM < 



3 CO CM iC Ci C 



CMCOCMOSOOiOOt- iCM uOCOOt:-(Mi-lt:-0:iiHCOUOCSlOCD'^^a: |0 

--- - iO'^cotr-t-icait^THt-ioo5t-;i>iMoqinc<i 

COOOt-^oioOOOOit-^uOCDCOci'^uOt^O"^* 00 



Tf'^OCMCMOOOCD 
i-HlOUOOCDCDCOOi 



rH t-^ Oi_ t-^ 1-H t> 
rH 00 OO' [> (TO 00 
1-1 -^ COi-( CO 



tH . ... . 

^ CD CO O rH p CD 

Q 

^ OO'^OOCDOOOOO 

►J iMtr-'^05OOCOiOlO 

I COCjToOt^'^t-^i-HllO 

I OS t- 00 Oi CD Cni 00 CD 

H r-lOiOOi-Ht-U^t--^ 



CD W OCD00'rt<lj0iM00C<lCD00(M(M00<M'^t-O 
t- Q^ lOCD'^OOi-iuO'Oi-HOCOO'— <'^l0t~0 



t-COOCDO'^UOCOi-l'^CMCDCM'^'^tr-iO 



n 

DS 

w 

Q 

OS „_ 

O ^. 00 56 lo [-_ t> -^ oj 

P3 oicoooNoooJo 



(i-l<NrH50^THmiNT-liHT 



a 

u 
w 

iJ O(M-^T)<IM0000OO00Ot00000-fl"^'^ 
^ ■^COOJi-l'H-^INIr-'^OiOstOOOT-llOOiH 



CDCinTH^(NiHlO'^<0(M0^'^'^0000OCC 



•^•^co-*tooooo 

OlOOOOt-COOOCO 

00 t^ LO tH^ o^ o_ o^ to^ 
i-T ^'' of oo" oo" oo" ^ -* 

N Cd" o" "*" oo" lo" IN to" 
iH rH Tj< CO 1-1 M 



^COlOOiO5!^CO00 

oo_-* ~ — - _ - 
^"o" 



O^ lO O^ C^ O^ t^ in C<1^ T-H^ rH^ 00 r-H^ O^ 1 
OOC^TtD 00 '*"o"lO CO CD (M :0 l> tH I 



n 
12; 

CEi 

H 

(N00C000O5LO 1-^ rr)-^W(>3t:-(M^^(^lCCOU^TI*THCOCOOCO 

S coait-^oaiasooouit-Tjioictot-rHio 



<X> O-^000^t-C<lOi— l-rfTHCCfMt-lCtOOtM 

y-l CD N O 00 M to -rP 00 CO tO^CO Oi-J^l^tD_Q0^00__ 

to Oo'lO cTlC of of of TH"oro^ T-t -^ O 00 CO t- 00 

to rHi-l (M iH in LO -H ■^ iH i-H rH T-H tH C- 



O o fe fe (i, J H ^ 



111 



.2 c 






■^ ~ 5 ,=« .9 A :•: .<? 5 .5 « > > > > > > r° 






^wc-cjtHcooascoo 



iOlOCDlOCOCDCOCOCCiLC 



" — 't-.oo 

- - -- , OOCJ 



;00 f-( I rHC 



00 Oi tr- UO CO O t "" " 



O(M00i-t<M0iC0C0C0O 



00 
00, 


,174 
,874 
,654 
,958 
,704 
,428 
,314 
,828 
,674 


00 t- 

oo 
coco 


LC 00 o 
loog o 

ID rH O, 


coo 

00 Oi 


00 


,782 
,783 
,537 
,224 
,445 
,957, 
,353 
,634 
,740, 


to t- 


eSno 

O i-H ^ 

t> i> eg 


lOCO 


00 


<oooo3mecocot-Ti' 

Urt^ CD 


r-IOS 


cJco'io" 


C5 



oasoaioofXiNoooo ico 

OWC^OOiOOOOCOOO o 

t-^odt*cocit6Ti^i>odt>i t> 



JtOasC0lO00(MO5t- ICClO 



icirsLCirsioioioinii 



(M 00 (M I 00 (M 
00 O CO O C5 
ID rA <^ CO C-^ 



00?CiO<:£>'^OCDNO<:D 
ICiH^'^'^t-iXii-IOOtM 
00 O -^^ N OS W 05^ w co^o_ 
zo tr-odoi t- coa^u^oSoo 

00O<N(MOa5ir5l>lO00 
CD (M_ Oi O^i-H 00^ (N O^ I> t> 

o" lo' as cvf oT t^ T-4" oo" o" w 

r-l CO CM eg 1-H (N 1-H rH 



o^cc>c3c<joo':d'^'^(X! 

Tt'OiiOCiTj^CSOOOS'^t- 

CO in <:q_ CD oo_ oi^ c^ 00^ Oi_ as_ 

ci" Tj^ I> 00* Cd' ■^" CO oT M co" 



00 _^ CO 00 O 00 -^ 00 CD -^ -^ 

t- ,^ locoiooiinco'^'^co 



05 C- i-H 00 1-H (M '^ 
00 t- rj* 05 00 CO 



iOi-HCDOOcO(Mir5COOrt< 



OiiOCOt>00CDO5CNC- 



(MC:>(MCDCpoC)Ot>q 
OOCOt-Otr--<#a5t- 
'^ CD C^ '^ CO *::)<_ -H_ CO CO_ 

cd"cd cTi-To o 00 L-^cT 

ICCirHCDINT^fiOOOO 



OOlOlOOOMurSO^OlO 



00 cc 


CO 


00 to to 


o to 


s *"* 


& 


O tH Oi 


(MCO 
00 ^_ 
05 l> 


o't> 




oi'io"'*'" 


M OJ 


Ol lOO 


m lO 


l> l> 


Eh 




lO,CO^ 


t-"<>f 


Q 


co'to'io 


ujoo' 


(M« 




(N lO 


tH 05 


OS 

u 




Oi 


00 '^ 


< 


eg 00 00 


00 (M 


,-H ,-H 


lOOi 00 


CO lO 


'3<^«0 


1 


C-;,CD ^ 


C5 in 


o"^" 


^ 


l> lo'rH 


-*" cT 


CO in 


C-CO OJ 


CO 00 


to ^ 


u 


co,a^ ^ 


l^rt^ 


oo'cJ 


H 


rH 


oJin" 


lO 


n 




lO 




tH 








H 








ij 








03 






in^ 


ino 00 


OJO 


10-* 


P3 


-i<='-' 


i-H CO 



ITS ic lo lo CO lo icio lO in ' lo 



UD lO to lO >J^ m lO IC m ' lO lO 



lOOOiOCOCOC-tr-iOfM-^ 

^ ^ '"!. "^ *H *"! '^ ^ '^ "^ 
oT TjT cd" i-H t> cd" o" CD oT (>r 

CO (M W T-( (N tH 



• a - 

«1; t.^ o-c s'iia b 3 



"*0O00OJ00oO(D'*(M 

iccooo(>]"^c^omco 



coiomt-itDcgcocoi> 

00^ ^ Oi, CO tO^ O], tH, to, o 

t- to to Tj^os r-Tc^'^to'^^'" 



o! 

^ C -g > 9 > 5 
3!H«a;0(uow.„ 



-Sg 






oo -^ 

(MO 



O O 



Summary of N. C. Dealer and Ware- 
house Resales-1963-64 



Belt Pounds 

Border Belt 

Dealer 3,345,932 

Warehouse 10,521,432 

Eastern Belt 

Dealer 8,167,413 

Warehouse 17,760,897 

Middle Belt 

Dealer 4,571,926 

Warehouse 7,819,998 

Old Belt 

Dealer 2,061,226 

Warehouse 6,469,192 

Total Flue-Cured Resales 60,718,016 

Burley Belt 

Dealer 784,900 

Warehouse 1,950,038 

Total Burley Resales 2,734,938 





Percentage 


Dollars 


Resales 


1,627,999 


1.8 


5,938,774 


5.9 


3,855,823 


1.8 


9,060,840 


4.0 


2,075,436 


2.6 


4,228,684 


4.4 


994,790 


1.6 


3,802,318 


5.0 


31,584,664 


6.5 


411,973 


3.1 


1,015,509 


7.6 



1,427,482 



10.7 



Producer and Gross Sales of Flue-Cured 
Tobacco By States-1963 



state 


Producer Sales 
Pounds 


Average 


Gross Sales 
Pounds 


Average 


N. C 

Va 

S. C 

Ga 

Fla 


872,579,600 

.... 162,014,830 

147,572,467 

159,583,576 

.... 22,928,074 


$58.44 
54.36 
60.67 
57.78 
57.01 


932,797,616 
168,393,666 
163,606,690 
173,195,347 
25,353,880 


$58.05 
54.20 
60.23 
56.98 
56.74 


Total . . . 


1,364,678,547 


$58.06 


1,463,347,199 


$57.70 



Stabilization Receipts By Belts-1963 

Producer Stabilization . .^entag:; 

Belt Type Sales (lbs.) Receipts (lbs.) '> ' i.c - : 

Old Belt IIA 281,214,430 128,763,022 45. i 

Middle Belt IIB 165,337,354 38,491,478 :3.-! 

Eastern Belt 12 421,882,034 62,966,596 14.y 

Border Belt 13 313,733,079 41,433,000 13.2 

Ga.-Fla. Belt 14 182,511,650 5,511,27'.' 3.0 

Total 11-14 1,364,678,547 277,165, ;J8 20.3 



Flue-Cured Movement In and Out of 
North Carolina 

N. C. Tobacco Sold Out of State Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C. 

(Pounds) (Pounds) 

State 1963 1962 1963 1962 

Va 52,665,034 45,306,472 9,192,719 11,612,041 

S. C 13,629,767 12,046,796 15,622,569 20,251,774 

Ga 3,500,202 4,625,589 1,256 

Fla 157,456 52,185 

Ala 1,544 

Total 69,952,459 62,031,042 24,816,832 31,865,071 



Burley Tobacco Movement In and Out 
of North Carolina 

N. C. Tobacco Sold Out of State Out of State Tobacco Sold in N. C. 

(Pounds) (Pounds) 

State 1963 1962 1963 1962 

Tenn 5,621,082 5,501,161 

Va 2,030 2,486 

W. Va 

Ga 

S. C 



1,357,290 


1,566,124 


2,212,196 


1,957,257 


34,396 


28,612 


41,924 


46,090 


768 


2,012 



Total 5,623,112 5,503,647 3,646,574 3,600,695 



19 



North Carolina Flue-Cured Crops 
1919-1963^ 







Yield Per 








Year 


No. Acres 


Acre 


Production 


Value 


Average 






(Pounds) 


(1,000 lbs.) 


(1,000 Dollars) 


Price 


1919 


521,000 


612 


319,276 


$157,340 


$49.30 


1920 


621,900 


681 


423,703 


88.271 


20.80 


1921 


414,900 


594 


246,540 


60,402 


24.50 


1922 


444,000 


611 


271,170 


74,572 


27.50 


1923 


544,300 


728 


396,354 


81,998 


20.70 


1924 


473,500 


585 


276,819 


62,597 


22.60 


1925 


536,200 


696 


373,352 


83,756 


22.40 


1926 


546,700 


692 


378,274 


96,762 


25.60 


1927 


639,600 


755 


482.982 


100.414 


20.80 


1928 


712,400 


692 


493,132 


93.450 


19.00 


1929 


729,300 


665 


484.630 


89.470 


18.50 


1930 


768,000 


757 


581,200 


74,733 


12.90 


1931 


688,500 


692 


476,382 


42,024 


8.80 


1932 


462,500 


624 


288,750 


34,949 


12.10 


1933 


667,800 


794 


530,133 


85,530 


16.10 


1934 


486,500 


847 


412,055 


117,999 


28.60 


1935 


612,500 


635 


572,625 


116,418 


20.30 


1936 


591,000 


765 


451,975 


101,856 


22.50 


1937 


675,000 


883 


595,815 


143,058 


24.00 


1938 


603.500 


844 


509,470 


115,428 


22.70 


1939 


843,000 


964 


812,540 


123,893 


15.20 


1940 


498,000 


1,038 


516,835 


85,792 


16.60 


1941 


488,000 


928 


452,825 


132,291 


29.20 


1942 


539.000 


1,052 


566,810 


221.538 


39.10 


1943 


580,000 


935 


542,200 


219,074 


40.40 


1944 


684,000 


1,077 


736,990 


317,628 


43.10 


1945 


722,000 


1,100 


794,310 


349,148 


44.00 


1946 


802,000 


1,138 


912,970 


451,639 


49.50 


1947 


783,000 


1,139 


892,205 


374,513 


42.00 


1948 


594.000 


1,239 


739,380 


368,040 


49.80 


1949 


621,000 


1,178 


731,530 


352.508 


48.20 


1950 


640.000 


1,441 


858,140 


477,508 


55.60 


1951 


735.000 


1,331 


978,375 


523,358 


53.50 


1952 


735,000 


1,222 


898,090 


448,582 


49.90 


1953 


674,000 


1,235 


832,305 


447,076 


53.70 


1954 


686,000 


1,204 


889,490 


483,003 


54.30 


1955 


653,000 


1,499 


978,775 


520,845 


53.20 


1956 


579,000 


1,661 


961,495 


496,324 


51.60 


1957 


443,000 


1,469 


650,780 


358,442 


55.10 


1958 


429,000 


1,718 


736,855 


427,307 


58.00 


1959 


458,500 


1,533 


702.942 


407,055 


57.90 


1960 


457,500 


1,836 


839,870 


512,731 


61.10 


1961 


463,000 


1,797 


832,215 


541,468 


65.10 


1962 


483,000 


1,890 


912,810 


549,594 


60.20 


1963** 


460,000 


1,958 


901,663 


525,828 


58.30 



•Source: N. C. and U.SDA Crop Reporting Service. 
•Preliminary for 1963. 



20 



North Carolina Burley Crops 
1928-1963* 







Yield Per 








Year 


No. Acres 


Acre 


Production 


Value 


Average 






(Pounds) 


(1,000 lbs.) 


(1,000 Dollars) 


Price 


1928 


3,600 


650 


2,340 


$ 690 


$29.50 


1929 


5,500 


730 


4,015 


863 


21.50 


1930 


7,200 


750 


5,400 


853 


15.80 


1931 


7,100 


710 


5,041 


464 


9.20 


1932 


6,500 


735 


4,778 


726 


15.20 


1933 


9,200 


785 


7,222 


715 


9.90 


1934 


5,500 


870 


4,785 


809 


17.50 


1935 


5,200 


925 


4,810 


1,025 


21.30 


1936 


6,000 


900 


5,400 


2,095 


38.80 


1937 


9,000 


975 


8,775 


1,787 


21.40 


1938 


8,600 


900 


7,740 


1,308 


16.90 


1939 


8,100 


1,070 


8,667 


1,447 


16.70 


1940 


6,500 


1,050 


6,825 


1,242 


18.20 


1941 


6,200 


1,075 


6,665 


2,093 


31.40 


1942 


6,600 


1,150 


7,590 


3,211 


42.30 


1943 


8,500 


1,225 


10,412 


5,102 


49.00 


1944 


12,000 


1,390 


16,680 


8,157 


48.90 


1945 


13,000 


1,500 


19,500 


7,568 


38.30 


1946 


9,800 


1,475 


14,455 


5,999 


41.50 


1947 


9,600 


1,560 


14,976 


6,335 


42.30 


1948 


10,300 


1,680 


17,304 


8,012 


46.30 


1949 


10,800 


1,440 


15,552 


6,750 


43.40 


1950 


10,500 


1,700 


17,850 


9,175 


51.40 


1951 


12,200 


1,750 


21,350 


11,572 


54.20 


1952 


12,000 


1,680 


20,160 


9,818 


48.70 


1953 


11,400 


1,800 


20,520 


11,019 


53.70 


1954 


12,700 


1,920 


24,384 


12,680 


52.00 


1955 


9,800 


1,900 


18,620 


10,651 


57.20 


1956 


9,400 


1,850 


17,390 


10,747 


61.80 


1957 


9,600 


1,975 


18,960 


11,073 


58.40 


1958 


9,300 


2,000 


18,600 


11,978 


64.40 


1959 


9,800 


2,060 


20,188 


11,426 


56.60 


1960 


9,500 


1,940 


18,430 


12,016 


65.20 


1961 


10.400 


2,090 


21,736 


14.346 


66.00 


1962 


11,000 


2,185 


24,035 


14,421 


60.00 


1963** 


11,000 


2,100 


23,100 


12,820 


55.50 



♦Source: N. C. and USDA Crop Reporting SerTice. 
•♦Preliminary for 1963 with value based on market average. 



21 



N. C. Flue-Cured Tobacco Allotments 
1964 



Acreage 
County No. Farms Allotment Rank 

Alamance 1,436 

Alexander 990 

Anson 261 

Beaxifort 2,368 

Bertie 1,717 

Bladen 3,208 

Brunswick 1,740 

Burke 1 

Cabarrus 1 

Caldwell -o3 

Camden 2 

Carteret 355 

Caswell 1.936 

Catawba 4 

Chatham 1,091 

Chowan 186 

Cleveland 1 

Columbus 4,861 

Craven 1,714 

Cumberland 2,409 

Dare 1 

Davidson 1,895 

Davie 849 

Duplin 4,278 

Durham 1,005 

Edgecombe 1,487 

Forsyth 2,363 

Franklin 2,680 

Gaston 1 

Gates 127 

Granville 2,147 

Greene 1,216 

Guilford 3,189 

Halifax 2,161 

Harnett 3,615 

Hertford 935 

Hoke 744 

iredell 823 

Johnston 5,277 

Jones 909 

Lee 1,305 

Lenoir 1,860 

22 



4,196.30 


37 


1,207.43 


50 


351.34 


61 


8,494.30 


21 


5,057.62 


31 


6,608.15 


28 


2,940.88 


41 


0.51 


69 


0.03 


73 


426.83 


59 


4.16 


66 


1,199.34 


51 


8,188.76 


23 


4.02 


65 


2,598.52 


46 


487.36 


58 


0.31 


70 


14,695.88 


7 


7,600.21 


24 


4,737.30 


34 


0.06 


72 


2,903.97 


44 


1,037..59 


53 


13,776.9;3 


8 


3,362.2! 


39 


10,258.42 


16 


4,330.35 


35 


10,156.84 


18 


4.09 


67 


241.67 


62 


11,867.13 


13 


10,675.74 


15 


8,079.98 


22 


5,250.38 


31 


12,871.67 


11 


2,907.58 


45 


2,279.20 


47 


1,088.87 


52 


20,289.90 


2 


4,836.28 


33 


3,652,22 


38 


12,455..S4 


12 



N. C. Flue-Cured Tobacco Allotments 
1964 (Continued) 



Acreage 

County No. Farms Allotment Rank 

Martin 1,454 7,580.74 25 

Mecklenburg 1 0.18 71 

Montgomery 404 861.27 56 

Moore 1,587 4,357.91 36 

Nash 2,854 16,150.49 5 

New Hanover 87 189.78 63 

Northampton 217 419.10 60 

Onslow 1,813 5,553.63 29 

Orange 956 2,937.76 40 

Pamlico 394 977.59 55 

Pender 1,662 2,919.54 43 

Person 1,731 8,571.05 20 

Pitt 2,623 22,529.03 1 

Randolph 1,645 2,906.72 42 

Richmond 962 1,853.77 48 

Robeson 4,639 18,434.42 3 

Rockingham 2,997 11,623.63 14 

Rowan 37 27.81 64 

Sampson 5,151 13,606.14 9 

Scotland 525 1,027.13 54 

Stokes 2,763 10,205.54 17 

Surry 3,081 9,743.59 19 

Tyrrell 2 0.51 68 

Vance 1,400 7,307.09 26 

Wake 3,736 17,281.57 4 

Warren 1,862 5,433.25 30 

Washington 296 855.65 57 

Wayne 3,033 12,964.61 10 

Wilkes 954 1,375.56 49 

Wilson 2,081 15,003.98 6 

Yadkin 2,694 7,173.94 27 



State Total 117,052 420,998.68 1-73 



23 



N. C. Burley Allotments 
1964 



County 



Numher 



Allotment Rank 



Alleghany 526 

Ashe 2,514 

Avery 245 

Brunswick 1 

Buncombe 3,056 

Burke 13 

Caldwell 26 

Catawba 3 

Cherokee 203 

Clay 209 

Cleveland 9 

Davidson 3 

Gaston 1 

Graham 695 

Granville 1 

Haywood 2,055 

Henderson 119 

Iredell 5 

Jackson 314 

Lincoln 2 

McDowell 86 

Macon 243 

Madison 2,900 

Mitchell 946 

Polk 7 

Randolph 1 

Rutherford 69 

Stokes 2 

Surry 8 

Swain 232 

Transylvania 77 

Watauga 1,656 

Wilkes 24 

Yadkin 1 

Yancey 1,836 

State Totals 18,088 



238.74 


9 


1,184.57 


5 


120.72 


11 


0.09 


35 


1,698.88 


2 


5.12 


21 


10.75 


20 


0.92 


26 


72.41 


15 


90.09 


12 


3.20 


23 


1.42 


27 


0.60 


29 


357.01 


8 


0.12 


34 


1,169.68 


3 


48.64 


16 


1.77 


24 


129.42 


10 


0.34 


32 


29.53 


19 


80.52 


14 


2,616.81 


1 


541.25 


7 


1.96 


25 


0.50 


30 


31.02 


18 


0.34 


32 


1.06 


28 


77.33 


13 


33.92 


17 


836.56 


6 


4.11 


22 


0.11 


33 


1,177.96 


4 



10,567.47 



1-35 



Source: USDA Aericultui-e Stabilization and Co 



24 



ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF THE TOBACCO 

INDUSTRY (Continued Prom Page 13) 

English colony at Jamestown, Virginia, tobacco was an export commodity 
that gave it an economic base and encouraged emigrants from England. 
Because these early colonial planters thought that tobacco would grow 
only on virgin soil, they were constantly extending the boundaries of the 
colony to the west and to the south by the clearing of forests for new 
tobacco fields. And tobacco soon became commodity money. Teachers, 
preachers, and soldiers were paid for their sei-vices in cured leaf which 
they then disposed of to traders. 

These might be considered interesting but irrelevant footnotes to history 
were it not for the fact that American tobacco continues to be commodity 
money to this day. For two years after VE Day, American cigarettes were 
the only stable currency in the retail markets of Germany, Italy and France. 
American GI's stationed in many far-flung countries can today buy a wide 
range of commodities at standard prices of so many packs of American 
cigarettes per unit. 



STATE SUMMARY (Continued From Page 15) 

postponed one day due to the funeral of President Kennedy. The quality 
of the 1963 crop was not as good as the previous year because of the large 
increase in the amount of green and off-color tobacco. This was brought 
on by an unusually dry curing season with low humidity so that tobacco 
dried too fast. The demand was weaker compared with the year before, and 
15% to 25% of the offerings were placed under loan. In fact, so much 
tobacco was placed under loan during the first three weeks that the Christ- 
mas holiday was started a week earlier than originally planned so that 
processing plants handling loan tobacco could catch up. 

The volume of producer sales on North Carolina markets rose again in 
1963-64 to 22,824,882 pounds compared with 20,891,171 pounds in 1962-63. 
The average price dropped to $53.19, which was $6.17 less than the pre- 
vious year's average of $59.36. The drop in average also decreased the 
dollar value to $12,139,689 compared to $12,400,863 the year before. 

The last sale was held in North Carolina on January 22 at Boone. This 
was a season of 26 sale days compared to 24 days the previous year. 

25 



North Carolina Tobacco Warehouses 
and Operations By Belts and Markets 

BORDER BELT 

Chadbourn (one set buyers) 

Producers — Jack W. Garrett, J. Franklin Bullard 
Green-Teaehey- — J. C. Green 

Clarkton (one set buyers) 

Bright Leaf — King Roberts, J. W. Shirley 
New Clarkton Whse. — Talley Bros. & Sons 
New Bladen — Jimmy Green, Billy Talley 

Fair Bluff (one set buyers) 

Powell— A. H. Powell & Sons 
Littleton's— Sidney Wise, J. C. McNeil 
Planters — Carl Meares, Ken Ray, Tom Lewis 

Fairmont (4 sets buyers) 

People's Big 5 — E. J. Chambers, Yarboro & Garrett Company 

Davis & Mitchell Davis— F. A. Davis, Harry & Jack Mitchell 

Holliday-Frye— E. H. Frye, J. W. and J. M. Holliday 

Planters No. 1 & 2— G. R. Royster, Daniel 

Square Deal 1-2-3— W. C. Bassett 

Star Carolina 1-2-3— W. M. Puckett 

Liberty-Twin States— P. R. Floyd, Jr., Paul Wilson, F. P. Joyce, Joe Pell 

Big Brick— V. J. Griffin, A. D. Lewis, Jr. 

Fayetteville (one set buyers) 

Big Farmers 1 & 2— P. L. Campbell, Sherrill Aiken 
Planters — J. W. Stephenson, J. C. Adams 

Lumberton (three sets buyers) 
Carolina — J. L. Townsend 
Smith-Dixie — Furman Biggs, Sr. & Jr. 
Hedgepeth — R. A. Hedgepeth, R. L. Rollins 
Liberty — R. H. Livermore 
Star, Inc. — Hogan Teater, D. T. Stephenson 
Lumberton Cooperative — C. E. McLaurin, Mgr. 

Tabor City (one set buyers) 

ByPass-Carolina & New Farmers — R. C. Coleman, Mrs. Harriet Sikes 
Planters — Don Watson, Mgr. 

Whiteville (three sets buyers) 

Crutchfield— G. E. & R. W. Crutchfield 

Lea's Big Dixie — William Townes Lea, Louie Love 

Moore's— A. H. Moore, C. C. Mason, C. F. Jeffcoat 

Nelson's No. 1 & 2 — John H. Nelson, Jim Smith 

Planters No. 1 & 2— A. O. King, Jr., J. W. Peay 

Gray-Neal Farmers-Columbus County — A. Dial Gray, J. L. Neal 

Liberty — J. W. Hooks, I. A. Barefoot & Sons 

Smith — Ernest Smith, Joe T. Smith, Jr., Percy McKeithan 

26 



EASTERN BELT 

Ahoskie (one set buyers) 

Basnight No. 1-2-3— L. L. Wilkens, H. G. Veazey 
Farmers No. 1 & 2 — W. M. Odoms, Pierce & Winborne 

Clinton (one set buyers) 

Carolina — L. D. Herring, C. J. Strickland 

Ross No. 2 — Guy R. Ross 

Farmers— H. A. Carr, J. J. Hill, W. M. Buck 

Dunn (one set buyers) 

Big 4 Warehouse — Tom Smothers, Jack Calhoun, Norman Hardee 
Planters — Leland Lee, J. M. Smothers 

Farmville (two sets buyers) 
Bell's— Bell Brothers 
Farmers — John N. Fountain, Mgr. 
Monks — John N. Fountain, Mgr. 
Planters & Prewits— Chester Worthington, W. A. Newell, B. S. Correll, 

& C. Prewit 
Lee's — Gordon Lee 

Goldsboro (one set buyers) 

Carolina— S. G. Best, D. V. Smith, D. Price 
Farmers No. 1— S. B. Hill, Carl Holloman, J. F. Hill 
Big Brick — J. R. Musgrave 
Victory — Richard Gray, Clarence Whitley 

Greenville (five sets buyers) 

Cannon's — W. T. Cannon, Carlton Dail 
Farmers— W. A. Tripp, Dal Cox, T. P. Thompson 
Star-Planters— Harding Suggs, B. B. Suggs, L. J. Hill 
McGowan's — J. A. Worthington, Jack Moye 

Keel-New Carolina No. 1 & 2 — Ashley Wynne, Floyd McGowan 
New Independent — Bob Cullipher, F. L. Blount 
Raynor-Forbes — Noah Raynor, A. H. Forbes 
Harris & Rogers — R. E. Rogers 

Kinston (four sets buyers) 

Central— W. I. Herring, Bill King 

Farmers — John T. Jenkins 

Kinston Cooperatives— S. W. Smith, Mgr. 

New Dixie — John T. Jenkins, Mgr. 

Sheppard No. 1 — J. T. Sheppard 

Sheppard No. 2— J. T. Sheppard 

New Central — W. I. Herring, Bill King 

The Star Warehouse No. 2 — C. J. Herring 

Banner— K. W. Loftin, John Heath 

Brooks Warehouse — Roger Brooks, Jr., Frederick Brooks 

Knotts New Warehouse— H. G. Knott, W. E. Brewer 

27 



Robersonville (one set buyers) 

Adkins & Bailey — Red Front — J. H. Gray, Jack Sharpe 
Planters No. 1 & 2— H. T. Highsmith, E. G. Anderson 

Rocky Mount (four sets buyers) 

Cobb & Carlton No. 1 & 2— W. E. Cobb, J. C. Carlton 

Mangum — Roy M. Phipps 

Planters No. 1-2-3— W. H. Faulkner, Mgr. 

Smith No. 1 & 2— James D. Smith 

Works Warehouse — R. J. Works, Jr. 

Easley Warehouse Company, Inc. — H. A. Easley, Mgr. 

Farmers Warehouse, Inc. — J. C. Holt Evans, Mgr. 

Fenners — J. B. Fenner 

Smithfield (two sets buyers) 

Big Planters— J. B. Wooten, Mrs. W. A. Carter 

Farmers No. 1 & 2 — Joe & C. E. Stephenson 

Gold Leaf No. 1 & 2— R. A. Pearce 

Perkins Riverside — N. L. Perkins 

Wallace No. 1 & 2 — Lawrence and Dixon Wallace 

Skinner's — Frank Skinner 

Tarboro (one set buyers) 

Clark's No. 1 & 2— H. I. Johnson, S. A. McConkey 
Farmers No. 1 & 2— W. L. House, J. P. Bunn 
Victory No. 1 & 2— Cliff Weeks, W. L. Leggett 

Wallace (one set buyers) 

Blanchard & Farrior — 0. C. Blanchard, W. H. Farrior 
Hussey No. 1 & 3 — Joe Bryant, Bill Hussey 
Sheffield's- John Sheffield 
Farmers — H. G. Perry 

Washington (one set buyers) 

Sermon's No. 1 & 2 — W. J. Sermons, J. E. Roberson 
Talley-Hassell 1 & 2— M. M. Hassell, W. G. Talley 

Wendell (one set buyers) 

Farmers — J. W. Stephenson & Sons 
Liberty 1 & 2— H. F. Harris 
Northside — G. Dean 

Wilson (five sets buyers) 

Big Dixie— E. B. Hicks, W. C. Thompson 

Wainwright — G. L. Wainwright 

Center Brick No. 1-2-3— Cozart & Eagles Co. 

Farmers — J. J. Gibbons, S. G. Deans 

Growers Cooperative — S. E. Griffin, Mgr. 

New Planters No. 1 & 2— R. T. & W. C. Smith, B. W. Carr 

Smith Warehouse, Inc. — H. H. Harris, Jr., Mgr. 

Watson — U. H. Cozart, Jr., Pres. 

Clark's— C. R. & Boyd Clark 

New Liberty— Carl B. Renfro 

Bob's Warehouse — Bob Clark 

28 



Williamston (one set buyers) 

Rodgers Warehouse— Urbin Rogers, Russell Rogers, Leland Barnhill 
New Dixie — Jim Pierce, Fisher Harris 

Windsor (one set buyers) 

Planters 1 & 2— C. B. & B. U. Griffin 
Heckstall— Max Hux, Julian Heckstall 
Spruills— Bill Davis, Grover Jernigan 



MIDDLE BELT 

Aberdeen (one set buyers) 

New Aberdeen— Tom Faulkner 
Planters— W. Fentriss Phillips 
Hardee's— Hugh T. Hardee 

Carthage (one set buyers) 

McConnells — G. Hoover Carter 
Victory— Earl Ennis & Buck Layton 

Durham (three sets buyers) ' ^ 

Liberty— Walker Stone 
Roycroft— H. T. & J. K. Roycroft 
Star-Brick— A. L. Carver, Cozart, Currin 

Farmers-Planters— J. M. Talley, Howard Talley, Bob Dale, Sam 
Mangum 

Ellerbe (one set of buyers) 

Farmers— S. H. Richardson & Lenon 
Richmond County— Bud Rummage, Bill Maurer 

Fuquay-Varina (two sets buyers) 

Big Top— Bill Talley & E. E. Clayton 
New Deal— W. M., A. R., A. L. Talley 
Goldleaf— Sherrill Akins & J. W. Dail 
Carolina— P. L. Campbell 
Roberts— Joe, John, & Earl Roberts 
Pierce— King Roberts 

Henderson (two sets buyers) 

Moore's Big Banner— A. H. Moore, C. E. JefFcoat 

Carolina— M. L. High, J. S. Royster 

Farmers— W. J. Alston, Jr. 

High Price— C. J. Fleming, C. B. Turner 

Liberty— George T. Robertson 

Ellington— F. H. Ellington & Sons 

Louisburg (one set buyers) 

Big Franklin— A. N. Wilson, S. T. & H. B. Cottrell 

Southside A & B— Charlie Ford 

Friendly Four— L. L. Sturdivant, James Speed 

29 



Oxford (two sets liuyers) 

Banner — W. L. Mitchell, Jr., David Mitchell 

Mangum-Faimers — T. B. Williams, Julian Adcock, S. B. Knott 

Fleming No. 1 & 2— G. B. Watkins, D. T. Currin 

Planters & Johnson— C. R. Watkins, C. R. Watkins, Jr. 

Owens No. 1 & 2 — J. S. Watkins, L. Gregory 

Granville— L. S. Bryan, Jr., W. W. Yeargin 

Sanford (one set buyers) 

Twin City 1 & 2 — W. M. Carter, T. V. Mansfield 
King Roberts 1-2-3 — King Roberts 
Castleberrys — C. N. Castleberry, Bill Wood 

Warrenton (one set buyers) 
Boyd's— W. P. Burwell 

Centre No. 1 & 2— M. P. Carroll, E. W. Radford, E. M. Moody 
Farmers — E. G. Tarwater 
Thompson — C. E. Thompson 
Currin's No. l^C. W. Currin 
Currin's No. 2 — C. W. Currin 



OLD BELT 

Burlington (one set buyers) 

Carolina — Harold Perkins, Burch Keck 
Coble — N. C. Newman, Curry King 
Farmers — Bill & Jack McCauley 

Greensboro (one set buyers) 

Greensboro Tobacco Warehouse Co. — R. C. Coleman, Mgr. 

Guilford County Tobacco Warehouse Co.— H. P. Smothers, W. B. Hull 

Madison (one set buyers) 

New Brick— R. T. Chilton, S. F. Webster 
Carolina— R. T. Chilton, S. F. Webster 
Sharpe & Smith— W. S. Smith, H. A. Pagg 
Farmers— W. S. Smith, H. A. Fagg 

Mebane (one set buyers) 

Farmers 1 & 2 — Joe Dillard, Jule Allen 

New Piedmont— A. 0. King, Jr., Billy Hopkins, Hugh Strayhom 

Mt. Airy (one set buyers) 

New Farmers— Tom Jones, Buck White, O. L. Badgett, F. V. Dearmin 
Hunters — J. W., J. L. Hunter 

Reidsville (one set buyers) 

Farmers — C. E. Smith, P. D. McMichael, D. H. Huffines 
Leader-Watts — A. P. Sands, W. A. McKinney 
Smothers — T. B. & J. M. Smothers 
Browns— C. E. Smith, P. D. McMichael, D. H. Huffines 

30 



Roxboro tone set buyers) 

Farmers— Lindsay Wagstaff, R. L. Hester 
Hyco— W. R. Jones, P. J. Hester, George Walker 
Foacre— H. W. Winstead, Jr., Pres. 
Planters No. 2— T. 0. Pass 
Winstead— T. T. & Elmo Mitchell 
Pioneer— T. T. & Elmo Mitchell 

Stoneville (one set buyers) 

Joyce's No. 1 & 2—0. P. Joyce, Willis Wake 
Farmers— F. A. Brown, P. M. Moorefield 
Piedmont — J. J. Webster 

Winston-Salem (four sets buyers) 

Brown— R. W. Newsome, W. B. Simpson 

Carolina-Star— G. H. Robertson, H. M. Bouldin 

Growers— Floyd Joyce, W. G. Sheets, J. R. Pell, M. M. Joyner 

Pepper No. 1 & 2— Fred Owens, F. L. Kellam 

Taylor— Paul Taylor 

Big Winston— R. T. & J. F. Carter 

Cooks No. 1 & 2— B. E. Cook, William Fowler, H. A. Thomas 

N. C. BURLEY BELT 
Asheville (two sets buyers) 

Burley-Dixie No. 1 & 2— R. A. Owen 

Planters No. 1 & 2— J. W. Stewart 

Bernard-Walker Warehouse — James E. Walker, Mgr. 

Day's — Charlie Day 

Walkers Riverside Warehouse — L. J. Hill 

Boone (one set buyers) 

Mountain Burley No. 1 & 2— Joe E. Coleman 

Farmers Burley— Joe E. Coleman 

Big Burley— King Roberts, R. E. Bullock 

West Jefferson (one set buyers) 

Tri-State Burley— C. C. Taylor, Rex Taylor 
Farmers Burley— Tom Faulkner, Hoover Carter 



31 



DOMESTIC CIGARETTE CONSUMPTION 
BY KINDS 1963 




Total Domestic Consumption 
511 Billion Cigarettes